The $37 price of HP cartridges has me ticked.
I saw on TV where Kodak had a sell session, where they claimed one of their
printers had about the cheapest ink cartridges.
Does anyone here have knowledge, or tales, about the
Kodak EasyShare 5300, '3 in 1' printer?
Hate to go from the frying pan into the fire.
Kodak wants you to buy their paper ink combos to save money. The ink does not get as good a mileage as they want you to believe. The printer is about average but better than Lexmark. It lags somewhat behind Epson and way behind Canon. In all you spend a little less but get way less than Canon.
But it is a better choice than the idiots make when they use an Epson or Canon with the crappy fly by nite aftermarket 10th party ink facimile.
theChas. wrote:
The $37 price of HP cartridges has me ticked. I saw on TV where Kodak had a sell session, where they claimed one of their printers had about the cheapest ink cartridges. Does anyone here have knowledge, or tales, about the Kodak EasyShare 5300, '3 in 1' printer? Hate to go from the frying pan into the fire.
I have looked at this and its bigger brother. Kodak has several options
offered in terms of consumables. They sell each cartridge separately,
they sell them as a set black and color (it uses two ganged cartridges),
and they sell the cartridges with 4x6 photo paper, if you are making
smaller prints, that's the best deal, I believe.
The inks are pigment and supposed to be long lasting. The build of the
3in1 printer looked pretty nice. The demo model I looked at showed
banding in the prints, but that might just be an abused or not properly
maintained unit. I have seen other output which was not banding.
The main problem I saw was the color rendition. The images had a bit
too garish a look for my liking. The subject of the demo images were all
oversaturated making it hard to know if it was the source material or
the drivers and profiles or the inks. The parrot image for instance,
looked way oversaturated.
I would suggest either seeing if you can find a store which will allow
you to demo an image you know well, or if not ask for print samples from
Kodak and try to decide from them if the color works for you.
Art
theChas. wrote:
> The $37 price of HP cartridges has me ticked.
> I saw on TV where Kodak had a sell session, where they claimed one of their
> printers had about the cheapest ink cartridges.
> Does anyone here have knowledge, or tales, about the
> Kodak EasyShare 5300, '3 in 1' printer?
> Hate to go from the frying pan into the fire.
>
>
>
I to agree with Mr.Entlich.
The pictures were not true to life for my liking.
The copy portion is a little off on accuracy too and loads the paper with
ink.
The prices claimed are with their cheapest photo paper and will compare to
Epson or Canon with the Kodak Ultimate as price per photo.
Just my 1 and 1/2 cents
"Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:PQnij.60879$EA5.2283@pd7urf2no...
>I have looked at this and its bigger brother. Kodak has several options
>offered in terms of consumables. They sell each cartridge separately, they
>sell them as a set black and color (it uses two ganged cartridges), and
>they sell the cartridges with 4x6 photo paper, if you are making smaller
>prints, that's the best deal, I believe.
>
> The inks are pigment and supposed to be long lasting. The build of the
> 3in1 printer looked pretty nice. The demo model I looked at showed
> banding in the prints, but that might just be an abused or not properly
> maintained unit. I have seen other output which was not banding.
>
> The main problem I saw was the color rendition. The images had a bit too
> garish a look for my liking. The subject of the demo images were all
> oversaturated making it hard to know if it was the source material or the
> drivers and profiles or the inks. The parrot image for instance, looked
> way oversaturated.
>
> I would suggest either seeing if you can find a store which will allow you
> to demo an image you know well, or if not ask for print samples from Kodak
> and try to decide from them if the color works for you.
>
> Art
>
> theChas. wrote:
>
>> The $37 price of HP cartridges has me ticked.
>> I saw on TV where Kodak had a sell session, where they claimed one of
>> their
>> printers had about the cheapest ink cartridges.
>> Does anyone here have knowledge, or tales, about the
>> Kodak EasyShare 5300, '3 in 1' printer?
>> Hate to go from the frying pan into the fire.
>>
>>
> The main problem I saw was the color rendition. The images had a bit
> too garish a look for my liking. The subject of the demo images were all
> oversaturated making it hard to know if it was the source material or
> the drivers and profiles or the inks. The parrot image for instance,
> looked way oversaturated.
The thought that leaped into my mind was, "Oh, that's just that classic
'Kodachrome Look.'"
It's a Kodak tradition -- that somewhat over-saturated color density
that Kodachrome has been famous for -- which makes it wonderful for use
on overcast days.
And my immediate question, then, is whether the color saturation can be
turned down in the driver. And also, can it be muted in photocopy
controls. If these adjustments can be made easily, and if they'll be
retained nicely, the printer will be civilized.
I used Kodachrome 25, 64 and 200 for years and the one thing I can say
for it is the originals, kept in dark storage don't seem to have lost
any of their color in 20-30 years. Not as lucky with the Agfa slide
films, although the E-6 Fuji and Kodak are still OK, but I think
somewhat faded.
Unfortunately, I don't know if the saturation can be adjusted, as I
didn't get to play with the unit. I imagine there is some saturation
adjustment in the driver adjustments, but how the ink and paper respond
to lower saturation is hard to know without samples.
Art
Richard Steinfeld wrote:
> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>> The main problem I saw was the color rendition. The images had a bit
>> too garish a look for my liking. The subject of the demo images were
>> all oversaturated making it hard to know if it was the source material
>> or the drivers and profiles or the inks. The parrot image for
>> instance, looked way oversaturated.
>
>
> The thought that leaped into my mind was, "Oh, that's just that classic
> 'Kodachrome Look.'"
>
> It's a Kodak tradition -- that somewhat over-saturated color density
> that Kodachrome has been famous for -- which makes it wonderful for use
> on overcast days.
>
> And my immediate question, then, is whether the color saturation can be
> turned down in the driver. And also, can it be muted in photocopy
> controls. If these adjustments can be made easily, and if they'll be
> retained nicely, the printer will be civilized.
>
> What do you think, Arthur?
>
> Richard
Rene Lamontagne wrote:
>
> "measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
> news:r%eij.63071$eY.25251@newssvr13.news.prodigy.n et...
>>
>>
>> Rene Lamontagne wrote:
>>>
>>> "theChas." <footboarder@bresnan.net> wrote in message
>>> news:4788d199$0$26049$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>>>> The $37 price of HP cartridges has me ticked.
>>>> I saw on TV where Kodak had a sell session, where they claimed one
>>>> of their
>>>> printers had about the cheapest ink cartridges.
>>>> Does anyone here have knowledge, or tales, about the
>>>> Kodak EasyShare 5300, '3 in 1' printer?
>
> SNIP, a whole pile of garbage.
>
> snip, a whole pile of garbage
What was SNIPPED
Ignore this post from la la monte. the Diarrhea that falls from his
mouth is not to be believed. Check out all of the reviews from all of
the magazines.
>
> Yes, I have a Kodak 5300 and am glad I bought it instead of the other
> 3 or 4 popular brands, The carts here in Canada cost me 10.00 for
> black and 15.00 for color, or a combo pack for 23.00, MUCH much
> cheaper than the others.
The ink does not go as far. When one color of a multi color goes out
the rest is thrown away. Kodak cannot compare to Canon.
> The print results are as good as Canon or Epson in my view,
Maybe in his view but not in the view of any professional review.
> I also have a canon and HP which have been put in the attic since I
> purchased the Kodak.
> You might like to go to a dealer and have them do a print of one of
> your photos , this will then tell you firsthand if it meets your
> expectations.
Not true. Have them do a half dozen 8.5x11 of various photos that
display a plethora of various colors and see for your self.
> As for myself I do recommend this printer, Would I buy again? YES.
First it is not a printer. It is a multifunction device. Many people
had trouble with their scanner. Epson makes the best scanner. Canon
makes the best standard format dye based printer. No ifs ands or buts.
Arthur Entlich wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> I used Kodachrome 25, 64 and 200 for years and the one thing I can say
> for it is the originals, kept in dark storage don't seem to have lost
> any of their color in 20-30 years.
That is totally false. I have slides of both a number of Kodachrome and
Ektachrome snaps that have been stored in a cool dark place. Some faded
and some faired better. There appears to be no difference between
Kodachrome or Ektachrome in that regard. K is warmer and E is cooler as
it is stated by Kodak.
> Not as lucky with the Agfa slide films, although the E-6 Fuji and
> Kodak are still OK, but I think somewhat faded.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't know if the saturation can be adjusted, as I
> didn't get to play with the unit. I imagine there is some saturation
> adjustment in the driver adjustments, but how the ink and paper
> respond to lower saturation is hard to know without samples.
>
> Art
>
>
> Richard Steinfeld wrote:
>
>> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>
>>> The main problem I saw was the color rendition. The images had a
>>> bit too garish a look for my liking. The subject of the demo images
>>> were all oversaturated making it hard to know if it was the source
>>> material or the drivers and profiles or the inks. The parrot image
>>> for instance, looked way oversaturated.
>>
>>
>> The thought that leaped into my mind was, "Oh, that's just that
>> classic 'Kodachrome Look.'"
>>
>> It's a Kodak tradition -- that somewhat over-saturated color density
>> that Kodachrome has been famous for -- which makes it wonderful for
>> use on overcast days.
>>
>> And my immediate question, then, is whether the color saturation can
>> be turned down in the driver. And also, can it be muted in photocopy
>> controls. If these adjustments can be made easily, and if they'll be
>> retained nicely, the printer will be civilized.
>>
>> What do you think, Arthur?
>>
>> Richard
On Jan 12, 2:42*pm, "Rene Lamontagne" <rlam...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> "theChas." <footboar...@bresnan.net> wrote in message
>
> news:4788d199$0$26049$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>
> > The $37 price of HP cartridges has me ticked.
> > I saw on TV where Kodak had a sell session, where they claimed one of
> > their
> > printers had about the cheapest ink cartridges.
> > Does anyone here have knowledge, or tales, *about the
> > Kodak EasyShare 5300, *'3 in 1' printer?
> > Hate to go from the frying pan into the fire.
>
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
>
> *Ignore the following post from measekite!. the Diarrhea that falls from his
> mouth is not to be believed. as He does not even own a Kodak and just
> blathers away to make himself feel important.
>
> Yes, I have a Kodak 5300 and am glad I bought it instead of the other 3 or 4
> popular brands, The carts here in Canada cost me 10.00 for black and 15.00
> for color, or a combo pack for 23.00, MUCH much cheaper than the others.
> *The print results are as good as *Canon or Epson in my view, I also have a
> canon and HP which have been put in the attic since I purchased the Kodak.
> You might like to go to a dealer and have them do a print of one of your
> photos , this will then tell you firsthand if it meets your expectations.
> As for myself I do recommend this printer, Would I buy again? YES.
>
> regards, Rene
Hey René:
Which Canon do you have in the attic?
Is it fully operational?
How much would you want for it?
<phineaspaine@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bb1ee95c-f87d-45bc-9e85-f107434bccd6@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 12, 2:42 pm, "Rene Lamontagne" <rlam...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> "theChas." <footboar...@bresnan.net> wrote in message
>
> news:4788d199$0$26049$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>
> > The $37 price of HP cartridges has me ticked.
> > I saw on TV where Kodak had a sell session, where they claimed one of
> > their
> > printers had about the cheapest ink cartridges.
> > Does anyone here have knowledge, or tales, about the
> > Kodak EasyShare 5300, '3 in 1' printer?
> > Hate to go from the frying pan into the fire.
>
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
>
> Ignore the following post from measekite!. the Diarrhea that falls from
> his
> mouth is not to be believed. as He does not even own a Kodak and just
> blathers away to make himself feel important.
>
> Yes, I have a Kodak 5300 and am glad I bought it instead of the other 3 or
> 4
> popular brands, The carts here in Canada cost me 10.00 for black and 15.00
> for color, or a combo pack for 23.00, MUCH much cheaper than the others.
> The print results are as good as Canon or Epson in my view, I also have a
> canon and HP which have been put in the attic since I purchased the Kodak.
> You might like to go to a dealer and have them do a print of one of your
> photos , this will then tell you firsthand if it meets your expectations.
> As for myself I do recommend this printer, Would I buy again? YES.
>
> regards, Rene
Hey René:
Which Canon do you have in the attic?
Is it fully operational?
How much would you want for it?
Phineas
It's an older model S900 and the print head is shot, not worth fixing.
New Kodak Printer questions 
Linear Mode
